Conventionally, a worker (e.g., trader, FBI agent) may have had all the computer components (e.g., central processing unit (CPU), memory, long term storage (e.g., disk, tape), display) for their computer located on their desktop. However, this may have created issues associated with security, air conditioning, real estate consumption, electrical capacity, upgradeability, administrative control, and so on. Additionally, this may have limited mobility. Thus, computer resources (e.g., processors, memory, storage) are increasingly being located remotely from where the services (e.g., applications, screen displays, information displays) are provided. For example, computer resources are being moved from employee desktops to centralized locations (e.g., data center, “back room”) to which the worker can connect. In particular, computer resources associated with highly specialized environments (e.g., trading desk, military, chip fabrication, tornado chasing, air traffic control, law enforcement) are being relocated.
Workers in these environments tend to move from location to location, sometimes from minute to minute. For example, a commodities trader may work Monday in London, fly to New York, work Tuesday in New York, fly to Chicago, work Wednesday in Chicago, fly to Aspen, ski all day Thursday, fly to Seattle, and work Friday in Seattle before returning to Aspen for the weekend. An FBI agent working an interstate kidnapping case may similarly relocate frequently. In a less intense scenario, a trader may simply move from desk to desk while working all week in New York. Additionally, workers in these specialized environments often have customized setups and configurations with which they are familiar and with which they would prefer to interact, regardless of the physical apparatus in front of them. For example, a certain trader may desire access to two services and would prefer for them to be available in a certain arrangement. These two services may be provided by two different computers at the back end(s) of the organization.
As the worker moves from location to location, the size, number, and capabilities of displays available may change. For example, a first desk may have one large display available, a second desk may have three medium displays available, and a third desk may have eight smaller displays arranged in a grid available. However, in two different geographic locations (e.g., Boston, N.Y.), a user may have exactly the same set of displays available. In one example, the layout of monitor displays and the mapping of resources to monitors determines the usability of the system and affects the productivity of the user. When highly valued assets (e.g., combat air traffic controllers) are required to work in difficult environments (e.g., active battlefield) where different sets of display hardware are available, then usability and productivity may be serious considerations. However, conventional systems may have forced a user to adapt to the available hardware rather than having the available hardware adapt to the user.
To reiterate, at one end (e.g., “back end”, “server side”), a set of relocated computing resources may provide a resource pool that provides a set of services. At different times, a service may be provided by different computers. At another end (e.g.,“front end”, “client side”), a set of display hardware provides a display environment with which a “custom display configuration user” interacts. Conventionally, it has been difficult, if possible at all, to establish and/or maintain mappings between a back end(s), front ends, and users while maintaining security and maintaining contact with the reality of the physical situation with which the user is confronted.